Report urges governments to secure land rights, consent, and equal participation of communities to meet 2030 biodiversity targets

A new international assessment, “Enabling Pathways for Rights-based Community-led Conservation”, warns that the world’s biodiversity ambitions risk falling short unless governments secure the rights and leadership of Indigenous Peoples and local communities who have long stewarded the planet’s richest ecosystems.

The study, which reviews legal frameworks and conservation strategies in 30 high-biodiversity nations across Africa, Asia and Latin America, concludes that while many states possess legal avenues to recognise community-led conservation, gaps in protection, political will and implementation remain significant.

The findings come in the wake of the Kunming-Montréal Global Biodiversity Framework (GBF), adopted in 2022, which enshrines the principle that durable conservation cannot be achieved without the participation and consent of Indigenous and Afro-descendant Peoples and other local communities. Yet, in practice, many who have safeguarded forests, rivers and lands for generations continue to lack secure tenure and protection under law.

The report identifies six critical actions for governments to honour the GBF’s 30×30 pledge to protect 30 per cent of land and sea by 2030. These include the formal recognition of communities’ land and territorial rights, the inclusion of Indigenous and Traditional Territories as distinct conservation pathways, and the enforcement of free, prior and informed consent (FPIC). It further urges the reform of laws to guarantee women equal rights to participate in community governance and calls for national biodiversity strategies to adopt explicit rights-based approaches.

While 26 of the 30 countries surveyed offer legal routes to recognise community stewardship within protected areas, traditional state-run models still dominate, often at the expense of community control. Moreover, fewer than half of the countries studied legally safeguard communities’ FPIC, leaving conservation projects vulnerable to repeating historic patterns of exclusion and displacement.

The study also highlights the persistent weakness of women’s rights in conservation governance. In many jurisdictions, women remain excluded from membership, voting, and leadership roles within communities, undermining both equity and the effectiveness of conservation efforts.

The authors stress that nearly all the countries examined possess at least some legal basis to advance rights-based, community-led conservation. The challenge now lies in translating legislative provisions into practice through political will, financial investment and partnership.

“Without secure tenure rights and strong protections for community-led conservation, states risk repeating the mistakes of the past,” the report warns, cautioning that displacement in the name of nature remains a danger unless rights are respected.

The assessment suggests that if countries seize these opportunities, the GBF’s goals may yet be realised. If they do not, conservation risks deepening divides between governments and the very communities best placed to sustain biodiversity over the long term.